3 U.S.C. § 417 — Prohibition of intimidation or reprisal
submitted 30 years ago by Pub. L. 104-331 to r/title-3-THE-PRESIDENT · 115 words · no verdicts yet
This section bans employing offices from punishing employees who oppose unlawful practices covered by this chapter. It also protects employees who file complaints, testify, or take part in related proceedings. Victims of retaliation can use any legal remedy that fits the harm.
(a) In General: An employing office* may not intimidate, retaliate against, or otherwise discriminate against a "covered employee*" because that employee* opposed a practice this chapter makes unlawful. This protection also covers an employee who started proceedings, filed a charge, testified, assisted, or took part in any way in a hearing or other proceeding under this chapter.
(b) Remedy: A violation of subsection (a) can be fixed with any legal remedy available. That includes remedies for the original unlawful practice the employee opposed, or remedies for whatever other violation of law the employee's proceedings, charge, or protected conduct addressed.
It shall be unlawful for an employing office* to intimidate, take reprisal against, or otherwise discriminate against, any covered employee* because the covered employee* has opposed any practice made unlawful by this chapter, or because the covered employee has initiated proceedings, made a charge, or testified, assisted, or participated in any manner in a hearing or other proceeding under this chapter.
A violation of subsection (a) may be remedied by any legal remedy available to redress the practice opposed by the covered employee or other violation of law as to which the covered employee initiated proceedings, made a charge, or engaged in other conduct protected under subsection (a).
Source credit: (Added Pub. L. 104–331, § 2(a), Oct. 26, 1996, 110 Stat. 4061.)
- 1996Enacted · Pub. L. 104-331 · 110 Stat. 4061
A history note hasn’t been published yet. The record shows enactment by Pub. L. 104-331 on 1996-10-26.
all 0 arguments · sorted by: best
no arguments yet — make the first case